If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Judges Question - Derby

Got this in a PM from a friend who wanted my opinion. Unfortunately her PM box was full.

So here it is. Comments?

Here's a hypothetical. Derby. Last series. Dog has run nearly perfect three series. On last bird down in fourth series. Dogs eyes flick --handler is in training mode. Quietly says "sit", Handler realizes mistake. Judge gives dog a number. Dog is sent for the go bird. As dog is returning judge asks handler if he wants to continue and pick up memory bird. Handler says of course and sends dog for memory bird. Absolutely perfect fourth series.

Handler realizes judges do not know rules regarding controlled break in a minor stake and are treating this as an automatic disqualification.

At the conclusion of the Derby judge stops handler and says dog can not be awarded a jam. Despite several other handlers and the marshal showing judge rule book regarding controlled break. Judge insists that dog wasn't going to break and says you can't talk to your dog while birds going down. Handler responds politely "how can you know that I thought dog might be going so I said sit". Which brings up the question of how to stop a break without saying anything in a minor stake.

In the end the judge awards dog a jam saying that in fact except for that quiet sit the dog would have placed either first or second.

I don't judge Field Trials but I would think that the judges need to decide if they're going to drop the dog or not. (Handler error) If they decide the dog is still playing, then they should be placing the dog based upon the merits of its work that day.

Section 25 of the “STANDARD’’ provides that noisy or frequent restraining of a dog on-line by his handler, except in extraordinary circumstances, is sufficient cause to justify elimination of the dog from the stake. In less flagrant instances, the degree of the penalty should correspond to the extent and frequency of repetition of the infraction. Although such is not required, it is a considerate gesture by Judges, if they are in agreement, to notify handlers when their methods of restraint are incurring penalties for their dogs.

I think the judges have some discretion based on what they saw and heard.

Why? In both the Derby & Q a controlled break is allowed. Handler error, but it has to be called as a controlled break. Still, what a shame that a dog who clearly was the superior marker that day was dropped to the bottom of the pack for something that in no way impacted the marking ability that the Derby is all about. I would have given him the first or second based on his marking and ignored the handler error.

Based on the facts as presented here, I probably would have argued to place the dog, if my co-judge thought differently. Hopefully they wouldn't.

You have to consider that the portion of the rules Bill quoted applies to dogs in ALL stakes whether Championship or Minor, and definitely allows the judges some discretion as to how it should be applied in each instance. Derby dogs are the least fully trained in the trial and are supposed to be evaluated for natural talents more than for trained responses.-Paul

The BOOK instruct the judges to treat a handlers talking to the dog between the time he signals for the birds and the time he is given his number as the handler believing that the dog was going to break....and to treat said talking as a controlled break.

In stakes that do not allow controlled breaks the dog is eliminated; in stakes that do allow for controlled breaks this talking should be judged accordingly.

I wish I could say "end of story" unfortunatly it seems that I cannot.......

john

Last edited by john fallon; 03-06-2014 at 06:02 AM.

"i guess the old saying 'those of us that think we know everything annoy those of you that does' " --bobbyb 9/13/06

[QUOTE=john fallon;1196251]The BOOK instruct the judges to treat a handlers talking to the dog between the time he signals for the birds and the time he is given his number as the handler believing that the dog was going to break....and to treat said talking as a controlled break.

In stakes that do not allow controlled breaks the dog is eliminated; in stakes that do allow for controlled breaks this talking should be judged accordingly.

I wish I could say "end of story" unfortunatly it seems that I cannot.......

You're a licensed judge, John. What would you do based on the information given, and why would you do so?

I'd like to hear from as many licensed judges as possible on this scenario.-Paul